Reason MClass?

[drez]

Mastering Suite is indeed very capable.

A couple of comments on the comments:
JohnI don't know if you've played with the beta or not, but the combinator is an exremely impressive piece of kit. My guess is that you don't consider it a big deal. For me, it makes the upgrade. I could have left everything else out, but the combinator is awesome. If you haven't got to play with it, I hope you download the demo to see what you might be missing. I seriously doubt that you can do the things in Chainer that you can do with Combinator.

And to those of you that think it would be easy to port Reason to VST, IMHO I think that it would be an impossible task. Reason has zero to do with the VST standard...they would have to completely rewrite the plugins. I doubt that they would consider that a good use of their time. They obviously are doing just fine with their current business model, so it wouldn't make sense to change their "prime directive". I hope they stay with what they've got and improve its current architecture...more synths, disk streaming, advancements in the sequencer, etc.

I just live Like 4 so much that I don't mind using them in tandem

[digitalmessiah]

I just live Like 4 so much that I don't mind using them in tandem

Like 4? is that the new program from TonAble? hehe. just messing with you

[vurt]

Reason MClass?


new scottish member?

[2windy]

I use Orion Platinum as my main application. I haven't fired Reason up that much lately. I never use 3rd party loops, if I have any sample loops in my tracks they have usually been made in Reason by myself. If I need any vocals I usually sample my own. Orion has a fantastic 'Groove Slicer' function on the sampler!

TBH, I hate pre made loops (musical more than precussion) and try to creat my own wherever possible. I do use R2.5 Rex files but thay are usually unrecognisable from from the original.

I have tried ReWireing a few off my old tracks but didn't find it that great a process. I would rather stream dry from Reason and import.

Anyway, it's late. I just got in from work (pissed) and I'm at work in 4.5 hours I'll leave it at that.

..apart from yes, I'd love Maelstrom as a VSTi...

Cheers

[soulkraka]

If only they would make a timestetching version of Dr. REX.

I agree 100% and have mentioned this a few times on the Props forum. The funny thing is is that someone basically accused me of "nitpicking" and asking for "esoteric" features!! LOL

Of course my response was "errrr...what do you think recycle and the 20 other beatslicers on the market are for? Must be a real esoteric feature when every daw includes this as standard now."

How long of a shelf life does Recycle have for god sakes? Integrate it please

[drez]

Reason MClass?


new scottish member?

I think its a new luxury car.

[popsych]

Mastering Suite is indeed very capable.

A couple of comments on the comments:
JohnI don't know if you've played with the beta or not, but the combinator is an exremely impressive piece of kit. My guess is that you don't consider it a big deal. For me, it makes the upgrade. I could have left everything else out, but the combinator is awesome. If you haven't got to play with it, I hope you download the demo to see what you might be missing. I seriously doubt that you can do the things in Chainer that you can do with Combinator.

And to those of you that think it would be easy to port Reason to VST, IMHO I think that it would be an impossible task. Reason has zero to do with the VST standard...they would have to completely rewrite the plugins. I doubt that they would consider that a good use of their time. They obviously are doing just fine with their current business model, so it wouldn't make sense to change their "prime directive". I hope they stay with what they've got and improve its current architecture...more synths, disk streaming, advancements in the sequencer, etc.

I just live Like 4 so much that I don't mind using them in tandem

You probably have no experience in programming. Reason synths as VST's would simply be a case of getting the particular code for a synth, which is most probably already self contained and add some wrapper around it's main functions so it would receive the vst midi input and export in vst out.

Of course you would lose modularity but that's to be expected. Even that could be remedied though , but that would be complex. REALLY complex

[Bassballjg]

I never meant to say that making Reason's modules VSTs would itself be easy, I am not competent to make such a judgement. It would be easy for Propellerheads to hire people with the background to do it, they have taken on coding staff over the last couple of years. It would not violate any physical laws of which I am aware to do so, so it is a matter of will and of percieved opportunity. I can see what they wouldn't bother, but you think they'd see a potential market out here based on the sheer volume of discussion of the subject of Reason and VST.

I have said that I agree with keeping Reason itself closed. On the other hand, why not bidirectional ReWire at least? That would make a lot of people happy. And if their intention is to be a comprehensive solution, then why not recording?

Is it possible that someday Propellerheads will be a victim of its own success? There is a fine line between confidence and complacency when you're winning, and it's almost impossible to see when you've crossed it. I do not think that this has happened yet, but the arrogance of success is an inevitable part of human nature. Sooner or later you have to learn something from the outside world and not just stay in your own box to stay fresh and successful in any creative endeavor.

I have confidence that Propellerhead will continue to make an excellent product, and do it their own unique way. But there are ways Reason can be improved which are being openly discussed in the millieu of their customer base and within that base that involve stretching beyond the PHeads orthodoxy. I just hope they're listening.

[drez]

You probably have no experience in programming. Reason synths as VST's would simply be a case of getting the particular code for a synth, which is most probably already self contained and add some wrapper around it's main functions so it would receive the vst midi input and export in vst out.

Of course you would lose modularity but that's to be expected. Even that could be remedied though , but that would be complex. REALLY complex

You are over simplifying.

Your saying something like "take this application that has completely been opotimized for Linux and the 2.6 kernel and put "insert magic here" in between so that windows can run it. Writing a Shim to put in between is not a good idea. The Prop's haven't coded anything to the Steinberg VST SDK, so none of their own classes are going to be easy to wireup.

Besides, the modularity with CV's is what makes reason so powerful.

[Meffy]

drez, exactly so. I know of no way, using VSTs and VSTis, to get the kind of audio, CV, trigger, and gate routing that's easy and natural using Reason. Without that extreme interconnectability Reason would lose a lot of its power (and much of its appeal to me).

[drez]

I have said that I agree with keeping Reason itself closed. On the other hand, why not bidirectional ReWire at least? That would make a lot of people happy. And if their intention is to be a comprehensive solution, then why not recording?

Is it possible that someday Propellerheads will be a victim of its own success? There is a fine line between confidence and complacency when you're winning, and it's almost impossible to see when you've crossed it. I do not think that this has happened yet, but the arrogance of success is an inevitable part of human nature. Sooner or later you have to learn something from the outside world and not just stay in your own box to stay fresh and successful in any creative endeavor.

I have confidence that Propellerhead will continue to make an excellent product, and do it their own unique way. But there are ways Reason can be improved which are being openly discussed in the millieu of their customer base and within that base that involve stretching beyond the PHeads orthodoxy. I just hope they're listening.

I think that you have eloquently made your point. Your statement makes me realize that companies like Ableton who have realized that "Audio" is as much an instrument as a VSTi are pushing the technology forward. Hopefully, the Prop's are coming up with something that allows us to use Audio in a more linear fashion, or at worst, a "spreadsheet" like method to make it easier to trigger multiple phrases.

Good discussion.

[popsych]

You probably have no experience in programming. Reason synths as VST's would simply be a case of getting the particular code for a synth, which is most probably already self contained and add some wrapper around it's main functions so it would receive the vst midi input and export in vst out.

Of course you would lose modularity but that's to be expected. Even that could be remedied though , but that would be complex. REALLY complex

You are over simplifying.

Your saying something like "take this application that has completely been opotimized for Linux and the 2.6 kernel and put "insert magic here" in between so that windows can run it. Writing a Shim to put in between is not a good idea. The Prop's haven't coded anything to the Steinberg VST SDK, so none of their own classes are going to be easy to wireup.

Have you ever done programming ? I think YOU are overcomplicating. Writing a front end would be nothing compared to actually implementing a synth algorithm and it could be done and finished within a week or two.

Besides, the modularity with CV's is what makes reason so powerful.

This is the major rub, but i would still like to use some refills as is and due to their proprietary monolithic nature i can't.

[bitcrusher]

Besides, the modularity with CV's is what makes reason so powerful.

This is the major rub, but i would still like to use some refills as is and due to their proprietary monolithic nature i can't.

I think the CV is a gimmick/ration for reason users. "virtual CV" seems like marketing hooplah.

I much prefer the Image-Line FL Studio method - internal controllers which can link to any VST, any control, without messy wires! Not to mention they sell their best stuff as VSTi's (albeit more expensive, exactly as Propellerhead *should* do if they wanted some of my money).

[Stupid American Pig]

to add to bitcrushers post- virtual wires can QUICKLY become way too cluttered- and if you want them to control 2 or more things, you need to split it with the spider CV further adding to the complication. FL can control 2 or moe things without having to worry about the logic of it all...

[Stupid American Pig]

and just to add, I dont want to make it a FL vs reason thread, as I have and enjoy using both...